Question about Devera

Wed Mar 5 06:42:22 PST 2003

My apologies on taking so long to make a response.

On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 10:39, Dr. Elmo wrote:
> Jag wondered aloud:
>  >Add this to my list of reasons[0] why I wish English had a phonetic
>  >alphabet.
> Reasons why English shouldn't have a phonetic alphabet.

<snipped, will be brought back later>

> 2) English has a variety of dialects, so that you'd still have confusion, 
> e.g. with some people insisting that "cot" was spelled the same as "caught" 
> and others insisting they were clearly different.

Interesting, although its also very common for people to change the
spelling of words just to mimic a certain dialect.  Take "Huckleberry
Finn" for example (I kept thinking 'chile' was referring to the country
when I first read that book in eight grade).

It seems that more of your arguments boil down to a phonetic alphabet
would be difficult to understand.  Well, I'll state the claim that a
phonetic alphabet would be no different from the spoken word, so any
argument about why english is not good with a phonetic language, is an
argument about why english is not good as a spoken language.  And
english seems to have served just fine as a spoken language for a good
number of centuries.